Fortran Compiler including IMSL for Macintosh

[f.a....@web.de]

Hi everyone,

I am new to Fortran and I have a hard time deciding on the right Compiler. As my colleges are working with it I would like to buy the "Intel Visual Fortran Composer XE 2013". My problem is that I cannot find a version including the IMSL package for Mac and I really need it. The only software package I can find supplying this combination is the "Absoft Pro Fortran Compiler".
So here is my question:
Does anyone know whether it is possible to get the "Intel Visual Fortran Composer" including IMSL?

Thanks in advance
Fabian

[mecej4]

Fabian,

This is based on what I know -- I am not speaking for anyone else:

Intel sells IMSL for its Fortran compiler on Windows only.

For Linux, Solaris, etc., you need to go to Roguewave, who bought VNI a
couple of years ago.

For OSX, I think Absoft is your only choice. I believe that Absoft
offers IMSL for use with Intel Fortran for OSX, and another version for
their own OSX compiler.

-- mecej4

[DanielH]

Na, hab ich zu viel versprochen? :)

[glen herrmannsfeldt]

mecej4 <mecej4...@operamile.com> wrote:
> On 1/16/2014 4:20 AM, f.a....@web.de wrote:

>> I am new to Fortran and I have a hard time deciding on the right
>> Compiler. As my colleges are working with it I would like to
>> buy the "Intel Visual Fortran Composer XE 2013". My problem
>> is that I cannot find a version including the IMSL package
>> for Mac

(snip)

> Intel sells IMSL for its Fortran compiler on Windows only.

Another solution is to get VirtualBox (free) from Oracle, or another
virtual machine system, run Windows inside it on your Mac, and then
the Windows version of the compiler, and its exectuables, there.

-- glen

[Terence]

f.a.b.21 asks:-

>Does anyone know whether it is possible to get the "Intel Visual Fortran
Composer" including IMSL?

As others have pointed out, you can run an Apple Mac under Windows.
I use Bootcamp and so can load Windows or native Mac O/S, using the OPTION
key while switching on.
.
Under the Windows boot, I run my very old 1985 F77 and also much newer
F90/95.

So Steve Lionel is giving good advice to suggest considering running the
Interl Fortran Compiler with IMSL under a WIndows boot.

There are one or two (some free) virtual machine softwares which run under
Apple O/S directly and offer running a Windows O/S under that, but it will
be quite a bit slower.

[glen herrmannsfeldt]

Terence <tbwr...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:

(snip)

> There are one or two (some free) virtual machine softwares which run under
> Apple O/S directly and offer running a Windows O/S under that, but it will
> be quite a bit slower.

Mostly it is slow because there is never enough RAM around.

Current (and not so current) OS X already needs more RAM than is
usual on the machines. Probably should have 8GB.

The virtual machine should be at least 4GB.

You want 10GB to 12GB to use both.

-- glen

[f.a....@web.de]

Wow, thanks for all these useful comments! Summing it up: there will be a solution for running a compiler including IMSL on my Mac. Great!

But which one?

@mecej4: Thanks for your advice concerning Roguewave. I found this link stating that the IMSL library is available for OS X:
http://www.roguewave.com/products/imsl-numerical-libraries/fortran-library.aspx
They even supply a list of compilers that are compatible with IMSL:
http://www.roguewave.com/DesktopModules/Bring2mind/DMX/Download.aspx?entryid=794&command=core_download&PortalId=0&TabId=607
But as there is neither any Absoft package listed nor anything about OS X I guess the list is not up to date. So I will ask the support whether there are any news.

@glen and Terence: Using a virtual machine is a very good idea and I am trying the program "wine" at the moment. I am a little scared of the speed problem as well and before I buy anything I will definitely give it a try and see how it works. BTW: 8GB is all my machine can do ;)
So perhaps the "Steve Lionel"-way is one step ahead right now...

@DanielH: Jep, Du hattest mehr als Recht! Toller support :)

Again, thanks for your help!!!
Fabian

[Janus]

Am Freitag, 17. Januar 2014 10:13:24 UTC+1 schrieb f.a....@web.de:
> Wow, thanks for all these useful comments! Summing it up: there will be a solution for running a compiler including IMSL on my Mac. Great!
>
> But which one?
>
> @mecej4: Thanks for your advice concerning Roguewave. I found this link stating that the IMSL library is available for OS X:
> http://www.roguewave.com/products/imsl-numerical-libraries/fortran-library.aspx
> They even supply a list of compilers that are compatible with IMSL:
> http://www.roguewave.com/DesktopModules/Bring2mind/DMX/Download.aspx?entryid=794&command=core_download&PortalId=0&TabId=607
> But as there is neither any Absoft package listed nor anything about OS X I guess the list is not up to date. So I will ask the support whether there are any news.

In case the library is indeed available on Mac OS, I guess GCC/gfortran would be a good choice for a compiler: It is listed as a supported compiler (at least on Linux) in the document above, plus it's free and works great on Mac OS.

Cheers,
Janus

[robin....@gmail.com]

On Thursday, January 16, 2014 9:20:19 PM UTC+11, f.a....@web.de wrote:
> Hi everyone, I am new to Fortran and I have a hard time deciding on the right Compiler. As my colleges are working with it I would like to buy the "Intel Visual Fortran Composer XE 2013". My problem is that I cannot find a version including the IMSL package for Mac and I really need it. The only software package I can find supplying this combination is the "Absoft Pro Fortran Compiler".

When why not buy it?

[Ian Chivers]

I can't find any information about IMSL for the Mac.

I went to their home page

http://www.roguewave.com/

and then followed the licks about product availability.

and came to this link

http://www.roguewave.com/DesktopModules/Bring2mind/DMX/Download.aspx?entryid=794&command=core_download&PortalId=0&TabId=607

The Intel site has details of their compiler product availability.

http://software.intel.com/en-us/intel-compilers

There is a link on this page to IMSL for the compiler, but this is under
Windows.

Here is the link

http://software.intel.com/en-us/rogue-wave-imsl-fortran-library/

Following the links I get to this page

http://software.intel.com/en-us/buy-or-renew/

and there is no mention of the IMSL library.

I checked with one of the UK Intel
sellers

http://www.polyhedron.com/

and there is no link to IMSL on this site.

there is also no reference at Polyhedron to absoft and imsl.

I would check with Roguewave
carefully before you buy any compiler
for the Mac if you must have the IMSL library.

Hope this helps

Ian Chivers


On 17/01/2014 09:46, Janus wrote:> Am Freitag, 17. Januar 2014 10:13:24

[f.a....@web.de]

@Robin: I asked Absoft for a trial version but did not receive an answer. And I don't want to buy it without testing it first.

@Ian: I will definitely check with roughwave support if there is a way to support the Intel Compiler on OS X with IMSL. But I guess I will probabaly have to split my HD and install windows if I want to use the combination IMSL+Intel compiler... Anyway. Thanks a lot for all the suggestions!!!

[Gordon Sande]

If you have a Mac Pro or other model that supports multiple hard drives
then use your
pocket money to buy a second drive and use it for all the MBR systems.
The hybrid
disks that BootCamp sets up are a well executed hack that solves the
immediate problem.
But there are various remaining problems and if you are adventursome
and want to
want several MBR partitions (say for Windows and Linux or Win32 and
Win64) then life
becomes interesting. If you can get your outfit to use OPM (other
people's money) for
the disk that is good but $100 pocket money will keep you from pulling
your hair out
and sufferring other griefs if anything should ever be done slightly other than
strictly by the book. Windows is happier away from the hybrid as it
then can deal with
the non-boot GUID disk completely and correctly.

In any case you will need the drivers that are the main part of BootCamp.

[Richard Maine]

Gordon Sande <Gordon...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 2014-01-20 09:10:52 +0000, f.a....@web.de said:
>
> > Am Donnerstag, 16. Januar 2014 11:20:19 UTC+1 schrieb f.a....@web.de:
> >
> > @Ian: I will definitely check with roughwave support if there is a way
> > to support the Intel Compiler on OS X with IMSL. But I guess I will
> > probabaly have to split my HD and install windows if I want to use the
> > combination IMSL+Intel compiler... Anyway. Thanks a lot for all the
> > suggestions!!!
>
> If you have a Mac Pro or other model that supports multiple hard drives
> then use your pocket money to buy a second drive and use it for all the
> MBR systems. The hybrid disks that BootCamp sets up are a well executed
> hack that solves the immediate problem. But there are various remaining
> problems and if you are adventursome and want to want several MBR
> partitions (say for Windows and Linux or Win32 and Win64) then life

> becomes interesting....

> In any case you will need the drivers that are the main part of BootCamp.

Don't forget the option to use a virtual system instead of BootCamp.
There is no doubt some performance penalty for a virtual system, but I'm
not sure it is really all that big in practice unless either

1. You are doing something with heavy graphics. (BootCamp isn't that
great there either, I suspect partly because the drivers aren't that
great. I finally gave up on doing games in BootCamp and I got a separate
Windows box just for games. I've been much happier since.)

2. You are at all short on memory. A virtual machine will use memory for
both OS-X and the virtual machine at the same time.

I've used both Parallels, VMWare, and VirtualBox at various times to run
WIndows on my Mac machines. The most recent time I used VirtualBox
(after becomming a bit annoyed at VMare's upgrade "deal", which amounted
to full list price for an upgrade that I would have needed only to keep
compatible with a new version of OS X). VirtualBox is free and seemed to
work fine for me.

--
Richard Maine
email: last name at domain . net
domain: summer-triangle

[Gordon Sande]

Agreed. I use Parallels for various single threaded things that have not
made it to MacOsX. But for keeping all the cores running full tilt under
OpenMP I boot a native partition. I want the portability checking of having
Windows 7/64, Windows 8/64 and Linux/64 available so the dedicated drive
makes life much easier.

Memory is cheap when compared to the license fee for a commercial Fortran
so keeping up with current machines makes sense. New iMacs seem to come with
8GB so the era of 640KB is long past (even if Bill Gates could not figure out
what anyone would want more than 640K!).

[Steve Lionel]

On 1/20/2014 4:10 AM, f.a....@web.de wrote:
> I will definitely check with roughwave support if there is a way to support the Intel Compiler on OS X with IMSL. But I guess I will probabaly have to split my HD and install windows if I want to use the combination IMSL+Intel compiler... Anyway. Thanks a lot for all the suggestions!!!

As others have said, the only vendor to offer IMSL natively on OS X is
Absoft, in conjunction with their own compiler. You can't even buy it
separately from Rogue Wave. Fortran libraries such as IMSL are compiler
and platform-specific, so you can't mix and match. The idea of using a
virtual machine is good, however, if IMSL is really what you want.

You might first want to look to see if the Intel Math Kernel Library,
which is included with Intel Fortran for OS X, has routines that will do
what you need. MKL is not as broad as IMSL, so it might not work for
you, but if it does it will save you money.

--
Steve Lionel
Developer Products Division
Intel Corporation
Merrimack, NH

For email address, replace "invalid" with "com"

User communities for Intel Software Development Products
http://software.intel.com/en-us/forums/
Intel Software Development Products Support
http://software.intel.com/sites/support/
My Fortran blog
http://www.intel.com/software/drfortran

Refer to http://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/optimization-notice
for more information regarding performance and optimization choices in
Intel software products.

[glen herrmannsfeldt]

Richard Maine <nos...@see.signature> wrote:

(snip)

> Don't forget the option to use a virtual system instead of BootCamp.
> There is no doubt some performance penalty for a virtual system, but I'm
> not sure it is really all that big in practice unless either

Yes. Especially since there is free VirtualBox. Also, it helps if
you already have a copy of another OS around.

> 1. You are doing something with heavy graphics. (BootCamp isn't that
> great there either, I suspect partly because the drivers aren't that
> great. I finally gave up on doing games in BootCamp and I got a separate
> Windows box just for games. I've been much happier since.)

> 2. You are at all short on memory. A virtual machine will use
> memory for both OS-X and the virtual machine at the same time.

In my experienc, Macs rarely have enough memory even without the
extra load of a virtual machine.

I found out recently that some recent Macbook Pro machines that
Apple claims only allow for 8GB, and sell with 4GB, will actually
allow up to 16GB. (Assuming you don't have Apple do the upgrade.)

The problems of virtual machines running virtual memory systems
go back at least to VM/370. You really want to avoid double paging,
where both the guest (system running inside the virtual machine)
and host are paging. For current systems, that seems to require
at least 8GB, and more helps a lot.

> I've used both Parallels, VMWare, and VirtualBox at various
> times to run WIndows on my Mac machines. The most recent time
> I used VirtualBox (after becomming a bit annoyed at VMare's
> upgrade "deal", which amounted to full list price for an upgrade
> that I would have needed only to keep compatible with a new
> version of OS X). VirtualBox is free and seemed to
> work fine for me.

-- glen

[Richard Maine]

glen herrmannsfeldt <g...@ugcs.caltech.edu> wrote:

> Richard Maine <nos...@see.signature> wrote:
[If]

> > 2. You are at all short on memory. A virtual machine will use
> > memory for both OS-X and the virtual machine at the same time.
>
> In my experienc, Macs rarely have enough memory even without the
> extra load of a virtual machine.

Guess our experience is different. Certainly older Macs were pretty
limitted, but I've not had such issues with more recent ones. Perhaps
you run more memory intensive things than I do.

The 8 GB on my current iMac (4.5 years old - bought it as a "birthday
present" for myself the day that the 27" ones were announced) has been
plenty to run either Parallels or VMWare virtual machines on with no
obvious problems. It will take 16 GB, but I never bothered.

My latest VM install was 2 years ago on a mini with 5 GB of ram. That
one might have been problematic except that the needs for that
particular system were quite modest. It was for my severely handicapped
son to run toddler games on. (Yes, he's 27 years old and toddler games
are what he does; I did say severely handicapped). Those games don't
take a lot of ram on the WIndows (XP) side, and nothing else at all is
happening simultaneously on the OS X side, so the 5 GB is adequate. I
did upgrade it from the 2GB that it shipped with. That's the one I
mentioned doing with VirtualBox.

[glen herrmannsfeldt]

Richard Maine <nos...@see.signature> wrote:

(snip, I wrote)

>> In my experienc, Macs rarely have enough memory even without the
>> extra load of a virtual machine.

> Guess our experience is different. Certainly older Macs were pretty
> limitted, but I've not had such issues with more recent ones. Perhaps
> you run more memory intensive things than I do.

It is mostly web browsers that like to cache, and web developers
that like to use fancy features of browser scripting languages.
Every few days, I close the browser, then reopen it. Firefox
remembers the previously open pages and reopens them.
Safari has "restore previous session."

Facebook is especially bad. It will keep doing things, and using more
and more memory, as long as it is logged in, even without you doing
anything with it.

> The 8 GB on my current iMac (4.5 years old - bought it as a "birthday
> present" for myself the day that the 27" ones were announced) has been
> plenty to run either Parallels or VMWare virtual machines on with no
> obvious problems. It will take 16 GB, but I never bothered.

Yes 8GB is probably fine, but 4GB is probably too small.
I believe current versions of Windows want at least 2GB, but
for good performance should have 4GB.

The one I write this on is a 1GB G4 Mac Mini. I also have a 2GB
intel Mac Mini.

-- glen

[glen herrmannsfeldt]

Steve Lionel <steve....@intel.invalid> wrote:

(snip)

> You might first want to look to see if the Intel Math Kernel Library,
> which is included with Intel Fortran for OS X, has routines that will do
> what you need. MKL is not as broad as IMSL, so it might not work for
> you, but if it does it will save you money.

Well, there is also Netlib, which has many routines that might be
similar to IMSL routines.

-- glen

[Richard Maine]

glen herrmannsfeldt <g...@ugcs.caltech.edu> wrote:

> Richard Maine <nos...@see.signature> wrote:
>
> (snip, I wrote)
> >> In my experienc, Macs rarely have enough memory even without the
> >> extra load of a virtual machine.
>
> > Guess our experience is different. Certainly older Macs were pretty
> > limitted, but I've not had such issues with more recent ones. Perhaps
> > you run more memory intensive things than I do.
>
> It is mostly web browsers that like to cache, and web developers
> that like to use fancy features of browser scripting languages.
> Every few days, I close the browser, then reopen it. Firefox
> remembers the previously open pages and reopens them.
> Safari has "restore previous session."
>
> Facebook is especially bad. It will keep doing things, and using more
> and more memory, as long as it is logged in, even without you doing
> anything with it.

I tend to be pretty paranoid^h^h^h^h^h^h^h^hconservative in my browser
usage. I regularly shut down and restart my browsers, I limit their
cookie retention, block popups, let flash run only when specifically
clicked on, use adblock plus (that one alone probably saves tons of
memory, though that isn't my reason for doing it), and use almost no
other extensions. Let me quickly check... In addition to adBlock plus, I
have only donottrackme, and 1Password. I also use LittleSnitch, which
blocks a lot of strange things.

Plus I don't go to porn sites. :-) Or lots of other "strange" places.

As for facebook, I do use it to keep in contact with offspring and some
other groups of friends (my bicycling group often uses it to coordinate
rides), but I refuse to use *ANY* of its games or other apps. I also
diligently logoff of facebook as soon as I'm finished using it because I
got spooked by several other sites that seemed aware of my being logged
into facebook; I didn't like that at all.

So yeah, browsers could explain a pretty big difference in memory usage.
And on the 5 GB system I mentioned doing for my handicapped son, there
was essentially zero browser usage. Maybe once every few months the head
caretaker at his group home would use a browser briefly to install
things or something of the sort, but the browsers were kept well out of
sight of my son. (He can't read, or for that matter talk, so there's not
much danger of him getting into it).

[DanielH]

I agree with Steve: the MKL can help a lot and is very good, but it
definitely does not have the breadth of IMSL. But there are (free)
alternatives to supplement the MKL, for example the GNU Scientific
Library, which also has a Fortran interface, called FGSL.

[John Harper]

And while we're comparing numerical packages there's also NAG. It costs
money but some years ago when we had both it and IMSL I found it was better
for the job I was then doing. Warning: that comparison was not comprehensive
and it may not be still valid. Both will have been improved since then, and
I certainly didn't test all of either NAG or IMSL.

--
John Harper